I did some research after the Yankees got shutout yesterday in their first game at that dome. Turns out we're not alone. It just happens that in 20 series openers at the Metrodome this year, the Twins are 15-5. In those 20 games, they've allowed a total of 62 runs, which is a 3.1 R/G ratio.

What's even more surprising is that since July, the Twins are 5-0 in home series openers and have allowed 4 runs. Yes, 4 runs. That's less than a run allowed per game.

They've also allowed 2 runs or less per game 7 times.

What I'm getting to is that the Twins have a HUGE advantage on series openers, most likely due to a horrible hitting backdrop that the hitters have a hard time adjusting to. Because looking at the schedule, the Twins usually lose in game 2 in the series and the opposing team scores a lot more runs.

kjhanson

08-12-2008, 11:23 AM

The other domed wonder, Tampa Bay, is 14-6 in their series openers, good for a .700 WP%.

Can you pull up the offensive production from the games beyond game 1?

thedudeabides

08-12-2008, 03:25 PM

I heard a player talking about this once, now I can't remember who. He said the Twins have a huge advantage at home, because you can kiss off the first game of the series. No matter how many times you play there, it's tough to get used to the hitting background and catching fly balls.

I've wanted to look up some numbers, but kept forgetting to. Thanks for the research.

TDog

08-12-2008, 04:32 PM

...

What's even more surprising ...

None of this is surprising. I have made the point about the Twins in first games of series at the Metrodome a couple of times.

It isn't just the visiting defense that has trouble acclimating to the dome. Visiting hitters come in and have to get used to the lighting in combination with the background. The last time the Yankees were in Minnesota this year, they won the first two games and lost the next two, but visiting teams rarely go into that dismal baseball facility and hit well in their first game.

turners56

08-13-2008, 03:50 PM

None of this is surprising. I have made the point about the Twins in first games of series at the Metrodome a couple of times.

It isn't just the visiting defense that has trouble acclimating to the dome. Visiting hitters come in and have to get used to the lighting in combination with the background. The last time the Yankees were in Minnesota this year, they won the first two games and lost the next two, but visiting teams rarely go into that dismal baseball facility and hit well in their first game.

I did some more math...

In game two of a series at the Metrodome, the Twins are 12-8 (including yesterday), while giving up 4.55 runs per game.

A 1.45 run differential compared to those in game 1.

ma-gaga

08-13-2008, 07:29 PM

I did some more math...

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but you're putting out a 'junk stat' without context.

What is the MLB record for "First Home Games"
What is the W.Sox record of "First Home Games"

I mean this, the MLB is having a resurgence of homefield advantage this year. Just telling me that the Twins have an advantage in their "first game" means nothing without putting it in context AGAINST THEIR PEERS.

:cool:

turners56

08-13-2008, 11:13 PM

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but you're putting out a 'junk stat' without context.

What is the MLB record for "First Home Games"
What is the W.Sox record of "First Home Games"

I mean this, the MLB is having a resurgence of homefield advantage this year. Just telling me that the Twins have an advantage in their "first game" means nothing without putting it in context AGAINST THEIR PEERS.

:cool:

Ever noticed that I also put up how many runs they give up per game?

hellview

08-14-2008, 07:10 AM

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but you're putting out a 'junk stat' without context.

What is the MLB record for "First Home Games"
What is the W.Sox record of "First Home Games"

I mean this, the MLB is having a resurgence of homefield advantage this year. Just telling me that the Twins have an advantage in their "first game" means nothing without putting it in context AGAINST THEIR PEERS.

:cool:

Man's got a point, you should post the same stats for other AL teams.

You have no job so just do it you Phish loving hippie...

turners56

08-14-2008, 09:17 AM

Man's got a point, you should post the same stats for other AL teams.

You have no job so just do it you Phish loving hippie...

Yes, I'm going to fish it out for all 30 teams in baseball just so I can make a point that the Twinkie dome sucks. Too bad it does already.

I don't need to tell you anything else besides the fact that the Twins' ERA at home is 3.29, on the road, it's 5.43...

That's a big enough variation to tell that it's not just the comfort of playing at home anymore, there's a certain other advantage. I mean come on, a two run difference?

The White Sox have a half run difference and their home/away records are pretty similar to the Twins. Same goes for the Red Sox who dominate at home, but have only a .38 ERA difference between home/away. Even the Rays, who also play in a dome and have the best home record in the AL, have only a 1.5 run differential between their home/road ERAs.

Yes, playing at home is always going to be better, especially this season. But the Twins stick out more than anybody else because their pitchers are horrid on the road, but absolutely dominant at home. Most of the AL contenders have a half run difference between their home and road ERA, while the Twins have a whole 2 runs...

BTW, I can't have a full time job...I'm still in school. :redneck

Frater Perdurabo

08-14-2008, 06:24 PM

Yes, playing at home is always going to be better, especially this season. But the Twins stick out more than anybody else because their pitchers are horrid on the road, but absolutely dominant at home. Most of the AL contenders have a half run difference between their home and road ERA, while the Twins have a whole 2 runs...

This is not a function of Twins pitchers pitching so well because they are so well adapted to the dome. It is a function of opposing hitters completely sucking in the dome. There is nothing about the dome that makes pitchers pitch better. But it does make hitters who are not used to it hit worse. The effect is the same, though: a huge discrepancy in home/road ERAs for the Twins' pitching staff.

ma-gaga

08-14-2008, 10:15 PM

I don't need to tell you anything else besides the fact that the Twins' ERA at home is 3.29, on the road, it's 5.43...
...
The White Sox have a half run difference

Ok, I did some 'math' here. This isn't the "first game" garbage that you were originally trying to push. This is simply overall 'Home' vs 'Away' results. xRuns and xERA are the differences in Runs and ERA from home and away.

So yeah, the Twins are clearly playing 'above their heads' at home (both offensively and pitching wise). I mean, that pitching line is 2 standard deviations above the average, and that's pretty incredible. I will try to figure out if I can put together a league wide "series opener" record to compare, but I ain't promising anything. Additionally, I should look at 2007 and 2006 results to see how the home field advantage in the league shaped up those years.

...

That said, the it should be noted that the W.Sox offense at home is playing above their heads.

:cool:

TDog

08-15-2008, 01:13 AM

...
So yeah, the Twins are clearly playing 'above their heads' at home (both offensively and pitching wise). I mean, that pitching line is 2 standard deviations above the average, and that's pretty incredible. I will try to figure out if I can put together a league wide "series opener" record to compare, but I ain't promising anything. Additionally, I should look at 2007 and 2006 results to see how the home field advantage in the league shaped up those years.

...

That said, the it should be noted that the W.Sox offense at home is playing above their heads.

:cool:

I don't think there is any question that the White Sox play in a hitter's park. When teams come to Chicago, they come to play in a hitter's park. When teams come to play in Chicago, they deal with White Sox pitching in a hitter's park. Still, there are reasons all teams (except the Giants, it seems) play better at home. But the Cell isn't so different from other outdoor parks, with the exception of dimensions. Home teams always have an advantage on defense, but the advantage is slight enough that it won't overwhelm a superior defensive team. The Twins, on the other hand, have a defensive advantage that can overwhelm a team that is better a playing defense in an outdoor stadium.

Ted Williams used to say he had trouble hitting in night games in Comiskey because of the poor lighting. I don't need to break down his performances in night games in old Comiskey to see if he had trouble. Similarly, players have said they have trouble getting used to hitting and fielding in the Metrodome. The Twins are playing, what, .750 baseball in the first games of series. Players saying they have trouble getting used to playing in the Metrodome seems more a legitimate reason than an excuse.

turners56

08-15-2008, 11:07 AM

Ok, I did some 'math' here. This isn't the "first game" garbage that you were originally trying to push. This is simply overall 'Home' vs 'Away' results. xRuns and xERA are the differences in Runs and ERA from home and away.

So yeah, the Twins are clearly playing 'above their heads' at home (both offensively and pitching wise). I mean, that pitching line is 2 standard deviations above the average, and that's pretty incredible. I will try to figure out if I can put together a league wide "series opener" record to compare, but I ain't promising anything. Additionally, I should look at 2007 and 2006 results to see how the home field advantage in the league shaped up those years.

...

That said, the it should be noted that the W.Sox offense at home is playing above their heads.

:cool:

Twins - play in a non-hitter's park with big dimensions.
White Sox - play in a hitter's park...

There's your difference between runs right there. Even so, the Sox only have 36 more runs at home than the Twins.

BTW, maybe you should do a stat comparing the offensive output of all AL teams in places other than the Metrodome. That'll work.

And btw, your list isn't really any different than what I said besides the runs part...

caravan shaker

08-15-2008, 01:24 PM

Hey everybody, twins fan here so don't ban me :smile:. I think your hatred of all things twins/dome is clouding your judgment. I'm not going to disagree with you that the dome sucks, it does, easily one of the worst parks in the majors. But I think you're making way too big of an issue of this "first game" advantage (along with the air conditioning actually having any significant effect in the bottom of innings, but that's a separate issue) so I went back and looked. Here's what the last five years have looked like:

2007
First game win pct: .423
Other games in series: .545

2006
First game: .654
Other games: .673

2005
First game: .500
Other games: .582

2004
First game: .692
Other games: .564

2003
First game: .577
Other games: .614

I actually went back and looked at the the games since 1987 (the year of their first world series) and in 12 of those 21 years they had a worse winning percentage in the first game of a series. I think you'd find similar statistics for every team if you were to look. Do the twins have a home field advantage? Yes, but so does every other team that doesn't have a "horrible hitting backdrop."

TDog

08-15-2008, 02:08 PM

Hey everybody, twins fan here so don't ban me :smile:. I think your hatred of all things twins/dome is clouding your judgment. I'm not going to disagree with you that the dome sucks, it does, easily one of the worst parks in the majors. But I think you're making way too big of an issue of this "first game" advantage (along with the air conditioning actually having any significant effect in the bottom of innings, but that's a separate issue) so I went back and looked. Here's what the last five years have looked like:

2007
First game win pct: .423
Other games in series: .545

2006
First game: .654
Other games: .673

2005
First game: .500
Other games: .582

2004
First game: .692
Other games: .564

2003
First game: .577
Other games: .614

I actually went back and looked at the the games since 1987 (the year of their first world series) and in 12 of those 21 years they had a worse winning percentage in the first game of a series. I think you'd find similar statistics for every team if you were to look. Do the twins have a home field advantage? Yes, but so does every other team that doesn't have a "horrible hitting backdrop."

You fail to take into account that there were previous years when the Twins had, not just a best pitcher, but a true ace in their rotation. Before Santana there was Radke. Santana for stretches was nearly automatic at home no matter when he pitched. This year, the Twins don't have that dominant starter. For example, people rip on Livan Hernandez because he was 10-8 with a 5.48 ERA when he was with the Twins, but in the three first games of series he started at the Metrodome, he was 3-0 with a 2.25 ERA. That included a quality start win in a June game he entered with an ERA of 5.22. If you take out those three games, he was 7-8 with an ERA of 6.09 for the Twins this year.

Statistics notwithstanding, the fact that opposing players and coaches consistently it is difficult to get used to playing in the dome points to an advantage. This year the Twins have been making the most of that advantage.

hellview

08-15-2008, 03:02 PM

Quick question...

Where was this massive homefield advantage for the Twins when they were consistantly the worst team in baseball?

doublem23

08-15-2008, 03:17 PM

Quick question...

Where was this massive homefield advantage for the Twins when they were consistantly the worst team in baseball?

Where was this massive homefield advantage for the Twins when they were consistantly the worst team in baseball?

You suck when you suck.

That's like saying where was the HMA last year when the White Sox won 72 games. The offense sucked, and when an offense sucks with its home at a hitter's park, the team is bound to suck.

TDog

08-16-2008, 03:26 AM

Quick question...

Where was this massive homefield advantage for the Twins when they were consistantly the worst team in baseball?

Some teams are so bad that other teams can overcome any disadvantage to win. It's kind of like how someone might be able to beat up on someone weaker with one hand tied behind his back, as the saying goes.

ma-gaga

08-16-2008, 03:27 PM

And btw, your list isn't really any different than what I said besides the runs part...

Actually, it proves what you were saying is correct. The Twins are playing ungodly at home and mediocre on the road.

But it really doesn't address the "first game" garbage. No offense but that argument seems created by bad AM sports radio blabber or whining by local media types who don't bother to do the research and/or base all of their 'evidence' off faulty memory.

TDog

08-18-2008, 06:52 PM

For what it's worth, Bob Geren on the A's radio pregame show tonight was talking about preparing his team to overcome the first-game home-field advantage the Twins will have in thethree-game series that starts tonight. Everyone in baseball knows it exists.

hellview

08-18-2008, 07:02 PM

For what it's worth, Bob Geren on the A's radio pregame show tonight was talking about preparing his team to overcome the first-game home-field advantage the Twins will have in thethree-game series that starts tonight. Everyone in baseball knows it exists.

Well if Bob Green of the A's radio network says so it must be true. I'm gonna quote Bert Blyeven tomorrow and Macheal Kay on Thursday.

Maybe the A's should worry about the fact that the A's for like 5 and 25 since the All-Star Break and 22-34 on the road this season.

TDog

08-18-2008, 07:08 PM

Well if Bob Green of the A's radio network says so it must be true.

Maybe the A's should worry about the fact that the A's for like 5 and 25 since the All-Star Break

Of course, I missed the fact that your denying what everyone in baseball has held as a given for years is satire. A brilliant parody of an idiot Twins fans confusing A's manager Bob Geren for someone named Bob Green.

Well played.

hellview

08-18-2008, 07:17 PM

Of course, I missed the fact that your denying what everyone in baseball has held as a given for years is satire. A brilliant parody of an idiot Twins fans confusing A's manager Bob Geren for someone named Bob Green.

Well played.

I'm not even worrying about it, I'm just gonna start ramdom teams radio networks to back up my fact.

No big deal.

Madscout

08-18-2008, 08:45 PM

I'm not even worrying about it, I'm just gonna start ramdom teams radio networks to back up my fact.

No big deal.
Except this radio network isn't a team in their division. If it were, I'd say, "Yeah, a clear bias." But this is like how much our radio cares what Texas is doing, or Toronto, or Boston. I know when we play them they worry, but they hardly bitch about them.

wealz07

08-19-2008, 01:51 PM

No data to back this up, just observation, but what makes me crazy about the Twins in the dome is that it seems like whenever they need a hit, they just hit the ball down in front of the plate and it takes off. I swear that area has concrete underneath it. Probably movable too for when the visitors bat. :D:

turners56

08-19-2008, 01:55 PM

I'm not even worrying about it, I'm just gonna start ramdom teams radio networks to back up my fact.

No big deal.

You're looking more and more like Timberwolf with every post. The bad grammar, the bad spelling typos, and incredibly arrogant and stupid opinions.

He's not making this up, why would he? BTW, if you noticed, TDog lives in the Bay Area. That's how he heard this.